WND

Critic astounded by German plans to revive 'Mein Kampf'

'There are bomb-making books on-line, should we publish one?'

Published: 04/26/2012 at 10:04 PM

Text smaller

Text bigger

How about publishing a book on how to make a bomb, as long as it includes an advisory stating that blowing up people is wrong?

It’s the same reasoning behind plans to republish Adolf Hitler’s work “Mein Kampf” – described by the BBC as “part biography and part political and racist rant” – according to a prominent author and evangelist.

Markus Soder, the Bavarian finance minister, said in the report that the state’s version would have extra information to “demystify” the manifesto. The goal is to reveal what “nonsense” the book contains.

Comfort called the rationale “ridiculous.”

“They are trying to justify it by saying that the book is already on the Internet, so they might as well have their own version and to warn people about Hitler,” Comfort said. “There are also bomb-making books on-line, so should we publish one that gives bomb-making directions with a special commentary telling people not to make bombs?”

The publisher’s news release said Germany’s Jewish community welcomed the decision to republish Hitler’s book.

“So all German Jews are over the moon with excitement about the book? I don’t believe it,” Comfort said. “I doubt if they have a handful, and I especially doubt if they are Holocaust survivors – who would be in their late 90s by now and not able to vigorously protest this stupidity. I’m Jewish, and I think this decision is outrageous.”

The Times report said the decision to publish followed a change in position by Germany’s Central Council of Jews. The report said General Secretary Stephan Kramer now is backing the idea of publishing an edition of the book with an explanation of its role in Nazism.

Hitler’s book was written while he was in jail in 1924. There are versions already available from various publishers.

“Germany should take a page out of Austria’s book. If someone promotes anything Hitler wrote in that country, they could be imprisoned for as much as 20 years,” Comfort said.

“It’s interesting to note that the spokesman for the state is the finance minister. I can’t help but wonder if dollar signs are clouding his vision. But if they won’t be deterred, I would suggest that they put graphic holocaust pictures of every second page. When I was researching, ‘Hitler, God and the Bible,’ it was pictures that brought me to tears,” Comfort said.

See the trailer for the “180″ video project:

“When we produced a movie based on, ‘Hitler, God, and the Bible,’ we put it on www.180movie.com and it received a million views in just 22 days. One of the reasons it got attention was because it began with 14 people (mainly university students) not knowing the identity of Hitler. It also showed interviews with people that love Hitler, despite what he did. There are crazy people out there that will feed off anything he wrote,” Comfort said.

The message of “180″ is that while many Americans no longer understand fully the evil of Adolf Hitler, they do condemn him when they understand the facts. Likewise, when they are introduced to the realities of abortion, they also condemn the procedure.

The movie has been watched millions of times online, hundreds of thousands of copies have been sold and tens of thousands have been given away in a special outreach on college campuses.

The film shows many young people don’t “have a clue as to the identity of Adolf Hitler.”

It goes on to liken the deaths of some 50 million Americans through abortion since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision to the horrific deaths of 11 million under Hitler’s leadership in World War II.

“The movie is unique in that it shows eight people who are adamantly pro-abortion, changing their minds and becoming pro-life – in a matter of seconds, simply because they were asked one question,” Comfort said.

The movie came about because of the book project. Comfort was interviewing university studies, finding out that many of them were unaware of Hitler’s extremism and evil.

He explained that when he started asking them specific questions, he was able to convince them to take another view of abortion. He asked if the students, at the point of a Nazi gun, would use a bulldozer to shovel Jews into a burial pit even if they were alive.

Most said they would refuse.

He then asked a correlating question about abortion: Did they think it’s a baby in the womb, and just when is it all right to kill that baby.